Deer & Deer Hunting Forums: White Tail Deer Hunting Forum

Just read the new article in Field and Stream regarding our Czar. I have to admit he gives me hope and I believe in this guy. Reading between the lines and considering his buddy Alt (who did PA's program), it feels like:

1. DMAP will be part of the program - there will be more localized harvest goals

2. Antler Restrictions will be part of the recommendation

3. CDW control measures will be scrutinized.

I think his intentions are good. The only piece that I don't believe in is the comments he makes regarding not being after the DNR. I have some friends that are close to this and they expect early retirements are coming soon within the DNR - he is not impressed, nor are most deer hunters in Wisconsin

I want to preface this by saying I'm not disagreeing with you just to start a controversy. I, like you would like to see some of the changes that Deer Trustee Team have implemented in other states. There are some main areas that I will outline below that I see as HUGH hurdles to overcome in Wisconsin.

1. DMAP: Seems to work in the south because of LARGE tracts of land being under control of one singular group with one goal. You don't have that dynamic in Wisconsin. Lots and lots of 10 to 40 acre tracts with neighbors that are competing with each other to shoot the next magazine cover buck.

2. Antler Restrictions: You think a (1) Buck Rule was controversial, just wait until this happens. This is, I believe anyway, in most peoples eyes, just an end around to reinstating EAB. You and I will agree that you can't shoot big bucks if you don't give the little ones a chance to get bigger. Most people would never admit it, but I think they have succumbed to the theory that big bucks are just there, much like the animal rights people seem to believe that supermarkets make the meat there. There is a disconnect that somehow, meat and big bucks are just exist, not that they are the result of a process.

3. No one will disagree that the CWD Management Plan needs to be revamped. The largest hindrance to revamping the plan is that no one knows how to fix it, or what exactly they are trying to fix. There is a disease that is increasing in infection rate, but there are no answers yet why it is happening and the fixes that have been tried are not yet affecting the infection rates.

4. The DNR: I don't truly believe they are out to kill the entire resource. I don't believe most people think they are either. What I do believe is that Kroll is correct in saying that the mind set has to change from regeneration to management. I also believe that the department has tried pretty successfully in the last 10 years to do just that, manage the population. Where it seems they've (DNR) derailed is in their explanation of how and why they are making the policies the way they are and getting the public to buy in. Just like the ACT 10 debacle, the DNR has been doing what Kroll seems to be telling them they need to do, they have done an abysmal job of explaining exactly why they need to do it.

I agree, I think the intentions are good, I am just worried about how the suggestions will be applied with the vastly different makeup of landownership in Wisconsin vs. the southern states where some of these ideas have been successfully applied.

I can't disagree with your points Dan - This is going to be extremely interesting to watch.

Antler restrictions have not been mentioned but they were bragged about as an Alt success in PA. They even mentioned how difficult it was to put in place. I guess Alt resigned because of the pressure but now PA is put up as an example for other states? Maybe I am reading too deep into this article???

I just got done shooting 3D with a guy who owns land and hunts in PA. He raved about the quality improvements in the state since the antler restrictions are put in place. As long as young kids don't have to comply, it will not affect me one bit. We have evolved to 3+ year olds and when we make a mistake it is a 2 year old. It would help myself and the neighbors who are working on QDM and stop guys from driving public land and swatting every buck that moves

I think that any regulation that is put in place that limits or prohibits a method of hunting is not a good regulation.

While I don't think that point restrictions would entirely kill drive hunting, it would severely limit the number of parties that would still consider using it. I am also certain that our party would continue to use driving (I should really say pushing) as a method of producing shot opportunities. We're using two and three person drives with two or three posters in the most likely escape routes. The last four bucks we have gotten with this method were easily seen and identified as larger bucks and total number of points before the shots were taken.

I guess, like Alt and Kroll have said, is that it will come down to hunters changing their mindset from consumers to managers. That change of mindset, will be the biggest hurdle to tackle in Wisconsin.

There is an attitude in this state that you're not a good hunter unless you shoot a buck, no matter the size, every year and that doe are too easy to kill so not worth the effort.

I can't help but think that the media has been mostly to blame for this attitude really through no fault of their own. What sells magazines? Pictures and stories of big bucks and how to shoot them, but what got lost in the message and still is lost in the message is how and why it is important first and foremost to be a steward of the land and the resource.

You're spot on Dan. The complicating thing to being a manager is the deer are located in pockets. Guys can't see the big picture. My neighbors frown at me for shooting does. I do so because I am over run with them. They let their land mature with no underbrush and sit over corn piles trying to pull deer from my and other neighbors property. They get an occasional doe or small buck moving through and think there are few deer. When I am sitting on a food plot 40 acres away watching 30 in the field.

1: DMAP would work to a degree with some of the local herds within city limits. However, aren't there enough tags available? Maybe lower the price for the antlerless tags to supplement DMAP.

2: Antler Restrictions, in my opinion, are not good for our state. I know, let em go/let em grow, got it. EAB produced some better quality bucks because you had to get a doe first. However, you start limiting what the hunter can shoot will probably lower license sales. Based off gun season only, how can someone without the resources, be told they can only shoot a buck with X amount of points? Times are lean, deer herds are up (maybe), but isn't hunting about the opportunity? I've given my story before, no need to rehash unless I need to.

3: I don't know what the CWD areas are like so I can't comment specifically. Maybe target the areas with the most CWD findings and have a year round season if that is what the DNR wants to do ultimately.

4: The DNR does need a little bit of monitoring. Wolf, bear, northern deer populations - A little bit more education to the hunters.

I wonder if the answer to antler restrictions will be different for different parts of the state. What I mean is, if you hunt in Rhinelander, I can see how antler restrictions will cause reduced hunter numbers and most likely cause a revolt. There is a lot of public land and public land hunters to manage.

Now in Buffalo County. I bet antler restrictions would be very popular. Mostly private land. People have figured out the quality of the deer hunting has a direct relationship to the value of their lands. They enjoy the benefits of having big bucks around. I bet it would be popular to have a 2 year old minimum restriction here?

One thing my buddies in Madison keep telling me - Dr Deer is not impressed on how the counties are using the biologists. Essentially they don't even participate in the deer program from what I am being led to believe. If you engage the biologist to help local strategies, it is possible to have varying regulations depending on the area of the state you are in - just like trout regulations - some stretches are trophy and some are not.